Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 333 online users. » 0 Member(s) | 330 Guest(s) Applebot, Bing, Google
|
Latest Threads |
Oratory Conference: Fr. H...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
58 minutes ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 1
|
Livestream: First Sunday ...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
Today, 07:43 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 56
|
Fr. Hewko's Mass: Thanksg...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
Today, 07:41 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 61
|
Heaven Opened by the Prac...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:33 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 79
|
Thursday Night Holy Hour ...
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
Today, 05:57 AM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 2,276
|
Fr. Ruiz: Renewal of the ...
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
Today, 05:05 AM
» Replies: 19
» Views: 1,808
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St....
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:24 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 196
|
The Catholic Trumpet: Bis...
Forum: True vs. False Resistance
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 121
|
The Editor of The Recusan...
Forum: Introduction to the Resistance
Last Post: Sacrificium
11-27-2024, 01:34 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 186
|
Feast of the Miraculous M...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
11-27-2024, 07:24 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 1,488
|
|
|
Quebec to force unvaccinated to pay financial penalty |
Posted by: Stone - 01-12-2022, 10:11 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- Replies (1)
|
|
Quebec to force unvaccinated to pay financial penalty
By Associated Press | Jan. 11, 2022
MONTREAL (AP) - The premier of the French-speaking Canadian province of Quebec says adult residents who refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19 will be charged a financial penalty.
Premier Francois Legault says that not getting vaccinated leads to consequences for the health care system and not all Quebecers should pay for that.
He said Tuesday the levy will only apply to people who don’t qualify for medical exemptions.
It’s the first time a government in Canada has announced a financial penalty for people who refuse to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Legault says the amount of the penalty hasn’t been decided but will be “significant.”
Video: https://www.wcax.com/video/2022/01/12/qu...l-penalty/
|
|
|
SSPX formally refuses to take a stand on the vaccines: Transcript |
Posted by: Stone - 01-11-2022, 03:02 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Spiritual]
- Replies (2)
|
|
NB: The following is a transcription done by a professional transcribing service of Fr. Pagliarani's recent conference (published January 5, 2022) on the subject of the vaccines. I have not double-checked the accuracy of the transcription word for word. Please do keep in mind too that English is not Fr. Pagliarani's native tongue.
As an aside, the SSPX missed the irony in entitling this Conference by Fr. Pagliarani, "The Superior General of the SSPX Clarifies the Vaccine Debate" because in reality, the SG did nothing of the kind. He simply stated repeatedly that the SSPX makes no stand on the topic. The comments to the video are rather interesting too...
Father Pagliarani (00:00):
I think it is worth it to spend few words about vaccines. It is a big issue. I can see that many of you are starting now to take some notes. It's a complicated issue. The theme of this talk is the mission of the Society. So, we will see what's the relation, if there is any, between the mission of the Society and the vaccines.
Father Pagliarani (00:37):
The Society of Saint Pius X seems too prudent about this question. Why the Society doesn't speak up about this problem? That all humanity now is kneeling, is exhausted because of this problem all over the world. Why Society doesn't speak up? The question is legitimate. We will try to answer this question. I will try to explain. So I'm going to settle the issue. And I'm going to answer the 1,000, 1,000, 1,000s of problem, objection, raised up in the Web. Huh? You can spend your entire life if you want, to have a complete idea of what's going on, updating yourself, I hope every day, because every day there are new elements.
Father Pagliarani (01:48):
But the question is really complicated. We don't deny this, not at all. But I want just to let you know why the Society's prudent. Another term without settling the issue, we will try to put this issue at its place. This is the purpose of this few words.
Father Pagliarani (02:19):
Well, until one year ago, mankind was come concerned about COVID only. Is it made in China? Was made in Taiwan? Does it kill? Does it not? Does it exist? Is it an influence like others? People in the hospital, they've been killed or they died out of COVID. Oh, all these questions, they have been very, very common until one year ago. They attract all the attention.
Father Pagliarani (03:05):
Right now I don't say that we forgot about the COVID, but right now all the attention is spent, paid to the vaccine issue. And that's understandable in a way. The governments, they try to impose the vaccine to everybody. It provokes a general excitement, and most of all provokes two camps, people who are against and people who are in favor. There are not a lot of people neutral. And the Web provides all the necessary information, tools to both of these groups.
Father Pagliarani (04:05):
So there is a general panic because of the danger of the vaccine in itself. But there is another panic, especially in people who are pro-vaccines, because mankind cannot go back to normality without the mandatory vaccine for everybody. So you see that the [electus 00:04:33], it's quite strong. As a result you should get the COVID. Your lungs are weakened, but people without COVID, doesn't keep upside of the problem. People without COVID are, in a way more stressed, than the sick ones.
Father Pagliarani (05:03):
So let's try to step aside for a few minutes of this very complicated situation, of these two camps, if you prefer, trying to analyze a bit deeper what's going on. Right now the great debate is around the side effects. The side effects of a vaccine produced very, very quickly, too quickly. It is true. And related to this medical issue, there is a political issue. How can the governments, the authorities impose such a vaccine, which is not tested enough? You know that normally for a new vaccine, you need seven to eight years. I leave it to the doctors the details about all this. Seven, eight years, for a complete testing, experimentation.
Father Pagliarani (06:19):
Everything was done very, very quickly. Why? Because there is a business behind. There are several countries that were producing their own vaccine, and they gave up a few, six months ago, because when the universal vaccinations started, they realized that they were going to lose the market. So there is a big business behind.
Father Pagliarani (06:55):
The side effects as a consequence of this lack of experimentation are not known enough. This is the first problem, but there is another problem, also a medical problem. This vaccine, it seems it doesn't last. It doesn't work enough. So, medical side, and again, political side. Political problem related to the first one. The authorities are making vaccinations mandatory, and they have to convince two kind of people. First of all, they have to convince the non-vaccinated people. They have to tell them, to explain to them that it's working. It's worth to receive the vaccine. And that's the only way we can get out from the crisis. This is the message for people not yet vaccinated.
Father Pagliarani (08:14):
But for people that they already got at least one, the vaccine, they have explain that they need a second, a third injection. Why? Because it doesn't work. So, the first one, they have to be convinced that it works. The second one, that it doesn't work enough. They are talking already about of course the third injection and then a booster every year. But they don't know how long it will last, this problem.
Father Pagliarani (08:55):
So, let's get to the point. Is it complicated? Yes. Is it a bit crazy, all this? Yes. Yes. Is the stress that right now is on the entire humanity, is it understandable? Yes. Yes. Is it legitimate to question all this? Yes. Is it legitimate to be against mandatory vaccination? Yes. Yes.
Father Pagliarani (09:38):
But this problem, this big problem, is related to a medical issue. This is the first reason why the Society of Saint Pius X is not entering straight into this debate. Of course, a priest can give a suggestion, can advise, but the Society as such is not entering into this debate. The mission of the Society is not to settle medical issues. The mission of Society is not to give an answer about all the possible side effects of the vaccine. And that's not only for COVID, even for other drugs. If they produce a new vaccine against chicken pox, and it seems there are some side effects or that vaccine is not tested enough, well, this is not the problem of the Society of Saint Pius X.
Father Pagliarani (11:17):
This is, I repeat, I stress, it's a medical problem that we cannot transform into a theological problem. Again, a priest can give a suggestion, can advise on a personal basis. Of course. You see on the opposite. Let's take another drug. There is a new drug produced against a cold that it seems has no problem, a normal drug against a normal cold. Well, if the Society states this drug is okay, and then that drug will provoke allergies, for instance, the Society is going to respond about the allergies. But what is the mistake? Mistake would be the Society expressed ourself on a particular topic, which doesn't correspond to our mission. This is the main reason, but there are other reasons why the Society, again, is kind of stepping aside. Doesn't want to enter straight into the debate.
Father Pagliarani (13:00):
It's a problem of globalism. Globalism, conspiracy. It seems that globalism conspiracy started one year ago with the vaccines. So now it's clear through the vaccine, there is a worldwide, universal authority imposing the same drugs for the same illness all over the world. That's globalism. Finally, the globalism did show up. The monster did show up. Be careful, because if all the attention is paid to this particular problem, and I repeat, we don't deny that it is a big problem, the risk is to forget that conspiracy started 300 years ago against the Church.
Father Pagliarani (14:09):
What's globalism, though? Globalism is this idea, this project, this intention to replace the Catholic Church with another universal authority. You know very well what I'm talking about, but let's not forget the origin of this conspiracy against the Church, which is affecting the entire humanity. Let's put in our terms the current crisis, the current problems, inside this entire picture. But to keep the entire picture, you can focus only about the present problem, talking about the present problem only. You cannot. And we have not the right to lose the entire picture.
Father Pagliarani (15:12):
Another point which I think is important, let's keep a supernatural perspective. [inaudible 00:15:20], it's normal, you are a priest. It's normal that you talk always about supernatural perspective, but here, the problem is the vaccine, and is a liquid, so there is nothing supernatural. Oh, the COVID, as every pandemic throughout history, COVID is also a punishment allowed by divine providence in order to purify us.
Father Pagliarani (15:55):
Because there is danger. I said at the beginning, we got tradition. We kept tradition, but we are not necessarily better than the others. We are sinners also. And if there is a universal punishment, it's for us also. If God allowed COVID it's not just for the sinners, for the sins of the others, it's for ours also. We die also, traditional people and priests die also out of COVID.
Father Pagliarani (16:32):
But I go back to the problem of globalism. Pay attention. During this year, thanks to the attention paid to the vaccine, which absorbed again for different reason, the entire humanity, the worst loss against the natural order. They have been approved in many, many countries. In Europe right now, in Western Europe, in every country, the same-sex marriage is approved, except one country, because there's still a debate. But our focus is not there.
Father Pagliarani (17:37):
Since our focus is somewhere else, it is much easier to promote and to approve all those laws. They are the main expression of globalism, of the destruction of the natural order. The order that the Church was keeping, was protecting, in order to create a new world with new laws, with the new authority, with or without COVID, with or without vaccines. This project didn't, I repeat, didn't start two years ago. It's much older.
Father Pagliarani (18:29):
And last reason, thank you for your patience and your attention also. There is another reason, again, why the Society steps aside. It's this anti-vaccine alliance. It is very heterogeneous. There are Catholics, but there are people with, without special political or religious creed, but there are people from the right side in this alliance against the vaccines, and mostly people from the extreme left to use a political language. Anarchist, the green. [inaudible 00:19:38] the green? The green are the people committed to the safeguard of, not the creation, of Earth, the ecologists.
Father Pagliarani (19:54):
This is a good left, extreme left. They know what they are talking about. They have targets which are very, very clear. Those kind of parties are quite strong in Europe. They're against the vaccine. In the name of what? In the name of what? In the name of individual freedom, human dignity, human rights. In other terms, with my body, I do whatever I want. With my life, I do whatever I want. So I decide if I take or not the vaccine.
Father Pagliarani (20:41):
We find again the same slogans of the '60s, of the '70s, of a particular class of women, "With my belly, I do whatever I want." You see? We find again the same principles of the new order started 300 years ago in the name of human rights, human dignity.
Father Pagliarani (21:18):
Let's be careful. On the other side, the pro-vaccine also, I think, it's good to stress this point, it's a paradox. They fight in the name of the same principles, in the name of human rights, in the name of freedom. Why? The conclusion is the same, but the principles are the same, but the conclusions is not the same. They want the mandatory vaccine in order to go back to normality, because if the others that don't take the vaccine, I'm touched in my freedom. I'm limited in my freedom. So I cannot travel. I cannot go on holiday. I cannot earn money as I used to do before. I cannot enjoy life. Why? Because I still have to put a mask or other restriction because of the others.
Father Pagliarani (22:26):
So I want to impose to the others in the name of human rights, the mandatory vaccine. In other terms, I don't want to have any restrictions because of the others. So, we all take the vaccine. It's a paradox, the same principles are on one side and on the other side. Shall we enter into this debate? Shall we take simply a part into this debate, entering [stride 00:23:07], the Society of Saint Pius X, for the reasons I gave. And other reason, of course that we don't have the time here to develop. Prefer, I repeat, to step aside.
Father Pagliarani (23:26):
But of course, it's a big issue. The issue is not settled. As I said, we leave present and live the future to Divine Providence. And we are sure that Divine Providence as well has never abandoned us in our struggle, fight for Tradition, is not going to abandon us in the middle of these new crisis. Thank you for your attention.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
The first question is about vaccines, which probably surprises no one. So the question, and a lot of these will be addressed to the panel and occasionally, at least initially to an individual, but everyone's happy to weigh in. The question, Father Pagliarani, is more or less in the end, is there official position of the Society on vaccines, on the COVID vaccine, whether it's the articles that have been published in the past or your talk? In light of your talk yesterday, is the only position the question of moral principles? Yeah. I thought I'd start with an easy one.
Father Pagliarani (24:52):
Yes, in my talk yesterday, I tried to focus on the main debate, the nowadays debate, which is on the side effects. And as I said, as a consequence, the political problem, how can an authority impose that vaccine which is not tested, which is not sure?
Father Pagliarani (25:29):
Of course, there are also moral questions, especially for this link with fetus, the cells coming from abortions. The Society, why this Society gave this particular answer and why the Society on that particular point didn't step aside, as we are doing now for the main present debate, well, question is quite easy to understand. People are faithful, as us. If I am a father, I have a family, I am the only one earning money. I don't have another solution. If I'm obliged to take the vaccine, am I doing anything immoral? Because if it is immoral, I will refuse the vaccine, and I will entrust the future of my family to Divine Providence.
Father Pagliarani (26:50):
So they ask this question, this specific question. The Society... You know the answer, the Society [esteems 00:27:03] that it is legitimate to accept the vaccine. Nevertheless, it remains a prudent decision. Anyone has to take into consideration the dangers for his health and so on.
Father Pagliarani (27:24):
So to go back to this controversial, I acknowledge the question is extremely delicate. As soon as we mention the word abortion, we feel repulsion. We feel... Of course, we don't want to have anything to do with that. It's clear. And we cannot have anything to do with that. But the principle that the Society apply, I try to explain maybe better, this point, is that it is in some circumstances legitimate to take advantage of the evil of others.
Father Pagliarani (28:20):
I will give you some examples. It is legitimate provided you don't corporate to the bad action. So the Society doesn't push anybody to receive the vaccine, but at the same time, the Society doesn't condemn. And that was the meaning of that article. Doesn't condemn somebody who in his personal, particular condition, situation will receive the vaccine.
Father Pagliarani (29:04):
I try to give you some examples of this principle, which is a classical principle of theology. St. Thomas Aquinas also is using this principle, is teaching this principle. You know that you can take out the cornea of somebody who is dead, even two, three hours after death. Is it legitimate to take out the cornea from somebody who is dead? Yes. Yes. There is not a problem that we can find with the organs, right? It is a tissue.
Father Pagliarani (29:48):
So, can you take out the cornea from somebody who was killed? Question. Yes. Provided you don't kill him on purpose to take out the cornea. That's the point. That's the point. You are taking advantage of a martyr. Somebody was killed. And without that sin, [honorable 00:30:26] sin, you couldn't take out the cornea, but of course you don't cooperate in any manner to that bad action.
Father Pagliarani (30:42):
Another example, if it can be useful for you, can the district of the United States of America donate your money for the building of a mosque? Of a synagogue? I think no, and I hope we are all agree. Can the district of the US receive as a donation a mosque in order to transform the mosque into a church?
Speaker 2 (31:25):
The answer is yes.
Father Pagliarani (31:29):
Yes. In the south of Spain, you have cathedrals that they were a mosque, and they kept something of the old ancient mosque. So, it's another example we could... Of course, we could multiply the examples.
Speaker 3 (31:51):
The Pantheon.
Father Pagliarani (31:51):
The Pantheon?
Speaker 3 (31:51):
The Pantheon.
Father Pagliarani (31:52):
The other example, obviously in Rome, the churches that were used, the Pantheon. I mean, Christians were martyred there, and yet it was used.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
There are dozens and dozens of churches in Rome built on pagan temples. Can I just give us a footnote to the Superior's remarks? Until Catholic answers had our own statement with respect to the vaccine up on catholic.com, I was very happy to refer to people the article, the first one in particular, with respect to the vaccine, which is thoroughly consistent with Catholic moral theology.
Father Pagliarani (32:38):
Yes, but it is understandable that when we mention abortion, there is a repulsion, right? To us, abortion. I'll give you another example. The last one, if you allow me, because the question is important, something that will fill you the same repulsion. Can you eat the meat? Or it's not anymore a modern problem. Some meat offered to the idols? The question arised 2,000 years ago. In the pagan rites, they used to offer, sacrifices, of course, and a part of the meat then was consumed by the offerers. And that meat was sold in the market.
Father Pagliarani (33:45):
Or maybe, whether you were invited from a pagan, and it was serving you, that meat offered the day before to the idols. So a matter, as a part of a pagan sacrifice. So can you eat that meat? Could they eat that meat, if you prefer? Because the Jews, they were scandalized. As [inaudible 00:34:16] said, "Yes, you can provide." You take to consideration the very fact that you could scandalize others, but this is another matter. But they could eat that meat.
Father Pagliarani (34:32):
Of course, a pagan's rite was the abomination for a Jew, like for us also. Nevertheless, they could eat that meat. So, it's understandable. It's understandable. Again, the [phase 00:34:53] of the abomination of abortion, right? There is this repulsion, but I take advantage of this explanation to try to make you understand why the Society was prudent. And again, if anyone is obliged, or there are particular situation, needs, well, the Society esteems that it's just taking advantage of a big sin of somebody else, but he doesn't participate to that sin.
|
|
|
mRNA pioneer Dr. Robert Malone warns of ‘full-on media warfare’ to implement Great Reset agenda |
Posted by: Stone - 01-11-2022, 09:27 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
mRNA pioneer Dr. Robert Malone warns of ‘full-on media warfare’ to implement Great Reset agenda
'People were coming to me talking about the ‘Great Reset,' And I was like, ‘Ah, this crazy talk,’ but then it’s all documented and then you see it being deployed … Here it is — they’re proud of it. They don’t hide it.'
Dr. Robert Malone
Mon Jan 10, 2022
FRONT ROYAL, Virginia, (LifeSiteNews) – Heavily-censored virologist and mRNA pioneer Dr. Robert Malone contends that the populace is in an asymmetric information war with the mainstream media, which seeks to implement the ‘Great Reset’ agenda outlined by the World Economic Forum (WEF).
“This is full-on media warfare, information warfare, political warfare, 21st century, like we’ve never seen before, and coordinated globally,” Malone said in a Jan. 1 interview with Kristi Leigh. “The other thing for me has been the personal journey of coming to terms with what the World Economic Forum really represents, and I really resisted that.”
“People were coming to me talking about the ‘Great Reset,’” he continued. “And I was like, ‘Ah, this crazy talk,’ but then it’s all documented and then you see it being deployed … Here it is — they’re proud of it. They don’t hide it. This is the vision. It is a full-on globalist totalitarian vision with the money in control.”
An internationally-recognized and a distinguished medical scientist, Dr. Malone possesses specialties in virology and vaccines. He is the originator of the mRNA technology now found in the experimental Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots. An increasing amount of evidence shows that the shots are harmful and potentially lethal.
Dr. Malone has come under attack by the mainstream media and medical establishment for his criticism of the COVID-19 inoculations and the U.S. government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In early January, Dr. Malone was featured as a guest on a now viral episode of the Joe Rogan Experience podcast in which Malone described his numerous concerns about the mandatory vaccination regime being imposed by governments worldwide.
“I believe nobody should have vaccine mandates for these experimental products,” Malone said. “I believe it is absolutely contrary to the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Agreement, the Common Rule, the Belmont Report, etc. It is lawless behavior that’s going — full stop.”
Dr. Malone recalled that as an undergraduate in the early 1980s at University of California-Davis that he read books on trans-nationalism and the establishment of the New World Order. However, he remained skeptical and unsure how implementation could ever occur — until now. “[We] see it playing out in real time and in a way in which national sovereignty, governments, are increasingly irrelevant. You know, that’s the thing that folks gotta wake up about. This is not about the vaccine. The vaccine is a symptom.”
Malone said that his long proximity and insider’s view of the politics in medicine did not prepare him for being in the spotlight after he articulated his critiques of COVID-19 vaccines and government mandates.
“I didn’t seek this. I never expected it. I find myself at the center of this storm of the resistance, and that’s what it is, really. … It has profoundly changed my view of the information that we receive,” the doctor said. “I had not been aware before of the information control that is globally coordinated.”
“It’s not about evaluating the truth. It’s about enforcing the narrative.”
Despite big tech and big media’s efforts to offer only singular viewpoints on the pandemic, Malone said that these tactics are galvanizing opposition. “There is a growing cohort of people that are increasingly aware of how thoroughly we’ve been manipulated.”
“This is asymmetric warfare,” he continued. “We’re basically in a guerrilla warfare situation and we gotta play it smart because what I’m seeing is the other side is generally not very smart. They have a big hammer. They’ve got all kinds of resources, but they don’t seem to be very bright.”
Malone said that this growing awareness of the ‘Great Reset’ and the limitations of those pushing it are reasons for encouragement in 2022. He expressed that a change in the “dysfunctional” structure of top-down governance in our large institutions would be one of the noticeable results of this recognition moving forward.
Malone concluded that he tries “really hard to look for the silver lining in things” and said that if humanity recognizes its interconnectedness and the importance of community, integrity, and human dignity during this moment in history, we will have a ‘A Great Awakening’ in response to the ‘Great Reset.’
|
|
|
Senate Bill Would Force States To Pair Voter ID With Vaccine Passports |
Posted by: Stone - 01-11-2022, 09:04 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
Senate Bill Would Force States To Pair Voter ID With Vaccine Passports
ZH | JAN 10, 2022
As Democratic lawmakers push America towards vaccine passports to participate in society - they're also pushing to weaken safeguards on voting, under the guise of 'voting rights,' a new Senate bill would force states to pair voter ID requirements with vaccine passports.
Quote:The legislation is the idea of Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota who says if a state forces people to prove their vaccination status, they should also have to prove who they are when they go to vote.
Sen. Cramer says he wants to point out the hypocrisy in Democrats who support vaccine passports but oppose voter ID -Fox5
"It seems just logical that if I had to show Bill Deblasio something that’s personal and private just to have a steak dinner in New York City, the least he should do is require people to prove they are who they say they are before they take on the very important responsibility of voting," says Cramer.
Virginia's newly elected Attorney General Jason Miayes agrees with the idea.
"The standard should be easy to vote and hard to cheat," he tells Fox5. "I think we all should have an interest in making sure that we trust our election system and voter ID is a very simple safe way to do that."
Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin, meanwhile, says he'll block vaccine passports altogether.
According to the report, Cramer acknowledges that trying to tie voter ID to vaccine passports will be difficult, but he hopes it will at least highlight the hypocrisy from the left.
|
|
|
Transcript for Fr. Pagliarani's December 2021 Angelus Conference |
Posted by: Stone - 01-11-2022, 09:01 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- No Replies
|
|
It's a great pleasure for me to be here for this conference. They gave me a broad title. The mission of the society, it's a classical title for the Superior. So he can talk a lot. So what we can say, the mission of the society is always the same. This mission is, and to keep this mission, the society has to remain always the same, has to remain what it is. Circumstances changed a lot during the last few years, this year in particular, we will see, but the role of the society is always the same, is to upholding, defending tradition. And the providential role of the society is more and more clear every year. Of course, as Superior General, I am not the best person, in the best position to say that there is not another option, but after the last Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes, the dismay of a lot of Catholics linked to tradition, the society becomes more and more a point of reference, not only for our faithful, but also for people observing us from outside.
And this conclusion is not because we are better than the others. No, that's not what I meant, but it's because without tradition kept in its integrality, people, they go nowhere, sooner or later, the lack of a doctrinal element, of a liturgical element, of a moral element, will show up and it will bear consequences. So I will try to talk, summarize a little bit the present situation of the society. First of all, we will talk about our present, current relation with Rome. Then I will give you three reasons why the society, as I said, is becoming more and more a point of reference. Our, our communities are growing a lot, all over the world.
About our relation with Rome. What can we say? Because the society had a long negotiation with Rome until 2017. It was a current subject of conversation. Everybody was waiting. What's the next step? Is the society going to be recognized? Is the society going to obtain a Canonical status, a Canonical acknowledgement in the church, in the official church? So this long negotiation had a lot of ups and downs. In 2016 in particular, we heard for the first time from the mouth of a Bishop, was dealing with the society, officially, "Listen after so many years, why should we impose you the council, to accept the council? Since we don't ask people who are going to the parish if they accept the council, why should we, the Vatican, ask you to accept the council?" So you see, we could get the impression that the acceptance of the council was not mandatory anymore. But then the following year, 2017, I don't know what happened.
Out of tiredness, everybody was tired, also in the Vatican. Cardinal Müller now is giving less of orthodoxy even to the Pope. But Cardinal Müller imposed to the society, to accept everything, to accept the council, to accept the new Mass, to accept all the teachings of the popes, even after the council. In other terms, the negotiation went back of 30 years, all of a sudden. A Canonical solution, a Canonical acknowledgement of the society was always submitted to a doctrinal declaration of the society, accepting all these elements and still a Canonical acknowledgement is submitted to this request. Of course, a declaration, a doctrinal declaration that we cannot sign, we couldn't sign and we cannot sign.
So in 2018, we tried to start again, a doctrinal discussion, more free, not necessarily in view of an agreement. But to present, freely, to achieve to present freely our reasons, our question, question of faith. Why there are elements that we cannot accept, errors. We wanted to start again with this discussion. At the same time, we wanted to show that through this discussion, we were recognized in the authority of Rome, of the Pope, because you don't discuss with an authority that you don't recognize. But actually they're not interested about this, at least for the time being. They answered us, "The society as to find first a Canonical status, then we can talk again about doctrine." Yes, you see the problem, the contradiction. A Canonical status is submitted to a doctrinal declaration that we cannot accept.
So we got stuck. We got stuck, but I stress this point. It's not the society that stopped this dialogue. It's Rome. Rome at the present moment, prefer us to procrastinate to another day, another period, when the situation will be more mature, this doctrinal discussion. Why this decision? They realized after so many years, that they didn't manage to convince us. And of course they think that we cannot either convince them. So the discussion for them is not interesting. But for us, it's a question of faith, [inaudible 00:09:12], to give you an example is a question of faith. The Kingship of our Lord' is a question of faith, the liturgical problem, it's a question of faith.
So they prefer to wait, and we have to wait too. So this issue is in the hands of God. Our relation with Rome, we still have relation of course, but not on the doctrinal side. For us, the doctrinal side, is the main one, is the hub of all the other problems. Everything is related to this. So we will wait patiently the occasion to start again with this discussion. Sooner or later, we will have to try again, and our doctrinal position, and the expression of our doctrinal position of tradition, is going on, it's not because we don't discuss it with Rome at the present moment, that through our publication, our conference, is we don't carry on the same struggle. So this particular point is in the Hands of God.
What about the development of the society during this last few years? Many of our chapels, communities all over the world, they had to welcome new faithful. Some communities, now they have double, and others, even more of the faithful they had two or three years ago. And there are even new communities, that they showed up during the COVID crisis. Why? Well, first of all, it was quite easy to understand, the church were closed and the Bishops scared. They imposed restrictions to their priests and to all the priests under their jurisdiction, under their authority, including priests saying the traditional Mass. They imposed for instance, communing the hands, forbidding Communion on the [inaudible 00:12:21].
So at the same time, our priests did all they could to keep our churches open, to assist the faithful, to give the sacraments. We had burials in private homes during the lockdown, not here in the US. They tried to visit the faithful at the hospital, taking some risk also. Our priests, they were free from the authority of the local bishops, and the society of our priests, they have this charisma, this ability to interpret laws, to implement restrictions with the, I would say, common sense. And that allowed, I think, a lot of good that the society could do, according to circumstances. So come before anything else, Supreme [foreign language 00:13:31], I would say in one word, our priest, they were ready. The society was ready for this crisis. They knew already what to do in very different situations.
The restrictions were different in any state, any country. The implementation of restrictions also didn't come at the same time everywhere, but our priests, they were ready. They knew what to do already. I can say I'm proud of them. I'm proud of this. It was a great joy to see, to perceive the zeal of our priest during this crisis. So as a result, the society, as I said, had to welcome new faithful everywhere. And in some new countries also, I mean, countries where the tradition was not known, or very little, well, it exploded during this crisis of COVID, during the lockdown in particular. It's amazing how God is using everything, even COVID. We were so scared of COVID. But God, who allowed COVID, he had his purpose, allowing this virus. God knows how to draw out good even from a virus, an illness.
So we lost some priests, that's the Cross, especially here. We lost, I can say one of our best priests Father [inaudible 00:15:39]. It's a big loss. We have certainly a new intercessor in Heaven. At the same time, God blessed us through this Cross. It is a lesson for the future. We are not going to make anything good with our human perspective only. The development of the society and the service that the society can and provide to the entire church and to every soul, doesn't depend just on our capacity, our abilities, our commitment. We have to keep faithful to our priesthood, to the heritage of the society of Bishop Lefebvre. And then Divine Providence will decide how, when this development of the society, the strife of tradition has to increase again. So obviously the main lesson of this event.
And now there is another reason which is attracting new faith to the society. It's a new reaction to the official teaching of the Pope, of Pope Francis in particular, of course. Pope Benedict represented the last effort, and I would say also the last illusion to interpret the council and continue with tradition. He was really concerned about that. He was seeking a harmony between the period before the council, the council, and this new period, new era of the church after the council. That's why he tried, for instance, to put the old Mass and the new Mass close, one to each other, in order that they could enrich each other, in order to show this continuity between old Mass and new Mass, for instance, where it didn't work. But most of all, we have to understand that Pope Francis doesn't feel this need anymore, doesn't feel this need at all. His is teaching is clear, and I will say a bit raw.
It draws out the last conclusion of the real council, what the council really meant for the church, it's more and more clear. Of course it was clear before also, but now it's becoming much more clear for everybody. On top of that, Pope Francis is touching morals. Amoris Laetitia is touching the doctrine on marriage. So of course, lay people, faithful, they're much more sensitive to such a problem, such a new teaching, than another teaching, or about more, so to speak, intellectual matters. The problem of religious freedom for instance, doesn't touch normal, lay people, normal faithful as a problem concerning marriage. Even if everything is linked, of course, but people are more sensitive. So the reaction is stronger. The awareness of the doctrinal problem is growing among a lot of faithful. This new reaction of course is attracting, is pushing souls and people to tradition. I would say they start to watch tradition with other eyes, with another side, and by consequence, watch The Society of Saint Pius X, with other eyes.
And then there is another reason, a more recent one, that is giving to The Society of Saint Pius X, I don't say a new role, but is showing better and better what The Society of Saint Pius X means to tradition, to the keeping of tradition. And of course this reason is the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes. So we have to spend, I think, few words on this important event. Unfortunately, because of the present [inaudible 00:21:42] linked to the vaccines and other problems, maybe we didn't pay attention enough to the meaning of this Motu Proprio of last July. It doesn't affect The Society of Saint Pius X directly. It affects the Ecclesia Dei communities. And as a consequence of new situation of the Ecclesia Dei community, it has a force repercussion on The Society of Saint Pius X.
Allow me a short foreword. On a personal basis, because of course we are going to talk about the Ecclesia Dei communities. On a personal basis, I have nothing against Ecclesia Dei people, or Ecclesia Dei priests. I do regret their situation, but we have to say when there is an error at the beginning, at the basis, sooner or later, that error will bear consequences, 10 years later, 20 years later, 30 years later. To give an example it's like the marriage of two young people, two teenagers. They want to get married, very young. They're full of illusions, "Full of love," they say, and they don't listen to anybody, especially to the parents. They have no idea of the responsibility they are going to assume.
And of course, they get married and many times, usually, it doesn't work. Sooner or later, a big problem can show up. Why? Because they didn't realize what they are doing. They don't listen. Sorry for this kind of comparison. But I think the Ecclesia Dei communities, they found themselves in the same situation. They are bearing now the consequences of an error they did at the beginning. Of course, we're not here to judge their intentions, but they made a mistake, a big mistake, But again, I have nothing against them on a personal basis. But the paradox is that the Pope himself, if you allow me to use this expression, looks fed up with them. The Pope who is supposed to protect them, it seems doesn't stand them anymore.
First of all, you know that the Ecclesia Dei as such, as a commission, that was meant to protect all the groups, faithful and priest, linked to the traditional Mass, but who, they didn't want to follow the Society of Saint Pius X, well, this commission was meant to protect them. And it was created in 1988. Three years ago, it was suppressed. Not last July, already three years ago. Why? I give you the official explanation? Because the idea of this commission was to reintegrate them in the mainstream of the church. After 30 years, they esteemed, they were reintegrated enough. So they didn't need anymore, in Rome, a special commission protecting them. This is the official explanation.
So we still call them Ecclesia Dei communities, but this name doesn't correspond anymore to a particular reality. Three years later, last July, this Motu Proprio, which shows that not everybody was well reintegrated. And you can see the Pope is not happy at all. Especially if you read the letter of the Pope, which goes with the Motu Proprio, it's an explanation of the Motu Proprio giving us the means, the deep thought, the deep idea of the Pope, he's not happy at all. Why? And here we touch the heart of the problem.
Pope Francis stressed that it cannot stand anymore, the instrumental use of the old Missal. What does he mean? He doesn't tolerate anymore that the old Missal is used as the expression of a spirituality, of a priesthood, of an idea of church, different from the one of the council. It is strictly forbidden to celebrate the old Mass as the expression of a different spirituality. This is the heart of the problem. We go back to the doctrinal problem, a question of faith.
In some particular situation, you could still celebrate the old Mass, provided it's not a parish, and most of all provided, it is clear that don't you stick anymore to any idea of a tradition, different from the one of the Second Council of the Vatican. I can just read few quotations of this letter of the Pope of last July. "I'm saddened that the instrumental use of Missale Romanum is often characterized by rejection, not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Vatican council itself, claiming with unfounded and unsustainable assertions that it betrays the tradition and the true church." This is what we think. And maybe even among Ecclesia Dei people, communities, somebody was thinking in the same way, hopefully.
"Whoever wishes to celebrate with devotion according to earlier forms of the liturgy, can find in the reformed Roman Missal, according to Vatican council Two, all the elements of the Roman Rite, in particular, the Roman Canon, which constitutes one of its more distinctive elements." Well, if the old Mass and the new Mass are the same, where is the problem? See? "A final reason for my decision is this, evermore plain in the words and attitudes of many, is the close connection between the choice of celebration according to the liturgical Books prior to Vatican Council Two, and the rejection of the church, an [inaudible 00:31:03] institution in the name of what is called the true church." Tradition. The [inaudible 00:31:14] to use," our, "Then has been made of this faculty, is contrary to the intention that led to granting the freedom to celebrate the Mass with the Missale Romanum of '62."
And of course, "[Foreign language 00:31:39], "I take the firmer decision to obligate all the norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that precede the present Motu Proprio, and declare that the liturgical Books promulgated by the saintly pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decree of Vatican Council Two constitute the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite." Well, it's quite clear. So in other terms, the traditional Mass, as the expression, I repeat, I stress this point, as the expression of what we stick to, the tradition of the church is not allowed anymore.
Why? We could wonder, why in Rome, eventually they took this decision. I think they felt that something went wrong. Traditional Mass was allowed in order to promote Communion, as they say, to enrich the two Masses, each other, one another. This is the intention most of all of Pope Benedict, but they realize that the old Mass, the celebration of the old Mass generates another conception of liturgy, of the church, of the priests, of Christian life. So as a conclusion, they had to go back, they had to withdraw the permission they had given. If you want to, we can use another expression. The old Mass cannot be used anymore as a banner, as the banner of tradition.
But the problem is that intrinsically the traditional Mass is pushing toward tradition. If a priest is committed, if a priest enter into this rite, into its meaning, sooner or later, he will question himself. He will question the council. So it's more and more clear that the intention, I think, now is important to look backwards. All the concessions, the indulgences that, during these 50 years, that have been made to people who wanted to stick to tradition concerning liturgy in particular, they were a homeopathy. Homeopathy, you try to heal an illness through the same principle of the illness. Like in the vaccine, but this is another issue. So you use the cause of the illness in order to, you give something. You give in a little bit in order to heal what you consider as an illness, as a problem.
But homeopathy doesn't work all the time. We can quote Bishop Roche. You know who is Bishop Roche, he's not just a free thinker, so his thought is an official thought. An official, I would say, interpretation of this reality. Bishop Roche is the present Prefect Of The Congregation Of Worship. He stated a few weeks ago, that Pope John Paul II Ecclesia Dei, and Benedict 16 XVI Summorum Pontificum, I quote, "Were established in order to encourage the Lefebvrists above all, to return to unity with the church." Homeopathy, "I give you something, but the perspective in my mind is not to allow tradition. It's not because I believe in your tradition, I reject this tradition. My purpose is to convince you to join the mainstream of the church."
And I still quote, "It is clear that Traditions Custodes is saying, 'Okay, this experiment has not been and entirely successful.'" Thanks God, "And so time is over. So let us go back to what the Second Vatican Council require of the church.Time is over. Now, we reach such an extent that if we still allow the celebration, freely, the celebration of the Tridentine Mass, the bad effect," so to speak, in their perspective, "Is going to be stronger than the good one. It didn't work, it couldn't work." So it was a parenthesis, another term, it was a parenthesis. It was just a question of time. So for Rome, all these indulgences, they've been a, as I say, homeopathic drug, in order to drag people into the mainstream of the church. And for Ecclesia Dei people, was a mean to give them the illusion they could keep tradition without being persecuted.
What can we say is a conclusion? This use of the Roman Missal, of the old Missal, as a Bishop Roche is describing it. This use is instrumental. This is an instrumental use, the reproach they are making to the ones that, through the traditional Missal, they draw out new conclusion about doctrine, and they are willing to uphold through that Missal a doctrinal statement. That's not an instrumental use. It corresponds to reality, because the Old Mass is a banner of tradition. But this use of the Roman Missal by the Vatican has been an instrumental use, it's not worthy of the church, is not worthy of the church to play with liturgical books.
So as a conclusion. Traditional Mass is our banner, because it's the banner of redemption of the Cross, of the only possible way to sanctify our souls. We prefer to die rather than to lose this banner. And for the [inaudible 00:41:10] this point, I think is important to stress it again, this banner is unique, not only for ourselves, but for the entire church. It's not just a privilege for the Society of Saint Pius X. The Catholic church has only one Mass, because there is only one redemption. And this redemption was expressed, and more, not only expressed, was carried on throughout the history by this Mass.
That's why we stick to this Mass. And we want this Mass, not only for us, not only for our churches, our chapels, for the entire church. You see, they accuse us quite often that we have lost the sense of the church, because we build our churches, the biggest one, the biggest seminary, "Yes, but you build all this for you, and you don't care about the church." This is not true. If we build still the biggest church and the biggest seminary, that's for the church. And if we keep this Mass as unique, that's for the church. Sooner later, we cannot choose the time, unfortunately, only God can do that. Sooner later, this Mass will become, again, the only Mass in the church. Why? In one world, because there is only one redemption.
So the 16th of July was the end, sad end of a long experiment, 30, 40 years of experiment. A last the consideration. How could Bishop Lefebvre take the right decision at the right moment? It's easy for us 50 years later to say, "Yes, he was right." Yes, back in the '80s, back in the '70s, how could Bishop Lefebvre took the right decision at the right moment? How? We see the fruit, we see the result now. It was not so clear at the time.
Well, I think the explanation is quite simple. There is supernatural gift, this capacity to be moved by The Holy Ghost. Even alone, even against everybody, isolated, this sensitivity to what is really the Will of God. It is a sign, I will say infallible sign of Holiness. It is clear more and more now than it was at the time. As I said, we leave present and we leave the future to Divine Providence. And we are sure that Divine Providence as well, has never abandoned us in our struggle, fight for tradition, His not going to abandon us in the middle of this new crisis. Thank you for your attention.
|
|
|
Pope pushes ‘moral obligation’ of COVID shots, calls for ‘reality therapy’ against ‘baseless’ info |
Posted by: Stone - 01-10-2022, 11:52 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Spiritual]
- No Replies
|
|
Pope pushes ‘moral obligation’ of COVID shots, calls for ‘reality therapy’ against ‘baseless’ info
Pope Francis delivered what have been described as ‘some of his strongest words yet’ in pushing the abortion-tainted shots
Pope Francis addressing the diplomatic corps, January 10, 2022.
Vatican News YouTube/Screenshot
Mon Jan 10, 2022
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis has once again strongly pushed for people to take the abortion-tainted COVID-19 injections, calling health care and vaccination “a moral obligation,” both for personal health and the health of others, while continuing to ignore moral concerns.
In his annual address to the diplomatic corps, Pope Francis touched on a wide-range of topics, including a delivery of “some of his strongest words yet” in promoting the abortion-linked COVID injections.
The 85-year-old pontiff called for “personal, political, and international” responses to global health, saying it is “therefore important to continue the effort to immunize the general population as much as possible.”
“Each of us has a responsibility to care for ourself and our health, and this translates into respect for the health of those around us,” stated Francis. “Health care is a moral obligation.”
Decrying the “world of strong ideological divides,” the Pope attacked what he described as “baseless information or poorly documented facts” pertaining to COVID-19.
“Every ideological statement severs the bond of human reason with the objective reality of things,” he continued, saying that COVID-19 has indicated the need for a “reality therapy” which would combat such “baseless information.”
Doubling down on the need for injections, Pope Francis added that while “vaccines are not a magical means of healing, yet surely they represent, in addition to other treatments that need to be developed, the most reasonable solution for the prevention of the disease.”
The Pope also re-issued one of his regular calls for globalized response to the health situation, urging “all states, [which] are working to establish an international instrument on pandemic preparedness and response under the aegis of the World Health Organization, to adopt a policy of generous sharing as a key principle to guarantee everyone access to diagnostic tools, vaccines and drugs.”
“Likewise, it is appropriate that institutions such as the World Trade Organization and the World Intellectual Property Organization adapt their legal instruments lest monopolistic rules constitute further obstacles to production and to an organized and consistent access to healthcare on a global level,” he added.
In response, U.K. author Deacon Nick Donnelly criticized the Pope’s comments for “rid[ing] roughshod over Catholic morality.”
Over the past 12 months, the pontiff has ramped up both his strength of language in promoting the abortion-tainted injections, as well as the frequency of such Big Pharma promotion.
In January 2021, he said that “ethically, everyone should take the vaccine,” describing objection to the injection as “a suicidal denial that I wouldn’t know how to explain.”
Pope Francis joined Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in taking the COVID shots in January 2021, as the Vatican began its own roll-out of the injections.
In August of last year, the Pope then joined a number of cardinals in issuing a public service announcement video, saying the shots bring “hope” of an end to the pandemic and called receiving the vaccine “an act of love.”
But in a paper released on December 12, 2020, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, along with co-signers Cardinal Janis Pujats, Bishop Joseph Strickland, and Archbishops Tomash Peta and Jan Pawel Lenga, expressed their strong conviction that any use of a vaccine tainted with the “unspeakable crime” of abortion, under any circumstances, “cannot be acceptable for Catholics.”
Then in January 2021, following Pope Francis’ first public endorsement of the COVID-19 injection, the former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò wrote:
Quote:In all of [his] metamorphoses, what has always emerged, alongside his capacity to totally remove himself from his institutional role, is the polyhedric character of the Argentine, who, we now discover, is also the promoter of pharmaceutical companies, a convinced supporter of vaccines and a zealous cheerleader of those who for a year now have been using COVID as a means to control the masses and to impose the Great Reset desired by the World Economic Forum.
“Catholics, illuminated by the sensus fidei that instinctively suggests to them what clashes with Faith and Morals, have already understood that the role of healthcare supply salesman is only one of the many parts played by the polyhedric Bergoglio,” closed Viganò.
|
|
|
Tennessee Catholics threaten to defund their diocese over COVID shot mandate |
Posted by: Stone - 01-10-2022, 11:41 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Spiritual]
- No Replies
|
|
Tennessee Catholics threaten to defund their diocese over COVID shot mandate
Jenny Hay is urging Catholics to defund the Diocese of Knoxville until it reverses its intention to 'discipline' and terminate employees who will not get jabbed or tested weekly.
Bp. Richard Stika of Knoxville, Tenn.
DioKnox TV / YouTube
Sat Jan 8, 2022
KNOXVILLE, Tennessee, (LifeSiteNews) — Catholics are threatening to defund the Diocese of Knoxville, Tennessee if a mandate requiring all employees to receive a COVID-19 shot goes into effect Monday, January 10.
The diocese announced shortly before Christmas via email that all of its employees “must be fully vaccinated no later than January 31, 2022 or submit proof of a negative COVID-19 test every 7 days from a medical professional and wear a cloth face mask over his/her face and nose while at work.” Those who do not comply “will be subject to discipline up to and including termination.”
The stated possible exemptions are narrowly given: “Employees may request an exception from this mandatory vaccination policy if the vaccine is medically contraindicated” or “may be legally entitled to a reasonable accommodation…because of a disability.”
Jenny Hay, chief organizer of the “Defund the Diocese” campaign, wrote to Bishop Rick Stika earlier this week announcing, “Effective immediately, we are suspending all our charitable donations to any operation of the Diocese of Knoxville until we receive assurance that the vaccine mandate…will not be imposed on diocesan employees. Further, we will use all means at our disposal to persuade others to do the same.”
Hay noted in her email that her family contributed no small amount in donations the previous year. She told LifeSiteNews that thus far, at least 100 people have shared their intent to follow through with the campaign to defund the diocese, if the mandate is passed.
“We dearly love you and our Church, but we cannot in good conscience grant legitimacy to this mandate by continuing to financially support the diocese,” Hay continued in her email. “Let there be no doubt that we look forward to a quick resolution so that we can resume our support. We understand the diocese may not implement this plan, pending U.S. Supreme Court action, but the plan already threatens diocesan employees.”
Diocese Communications Director Jim Wogan confirmed to LifeSiteNews Friday that they are “waiting for the Supreme Court to make a decision” regarding the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates for employers before deciding whether to implement the COVID shot/testing policy for the diocese.
However, Hay noted that “even if the Supreme court strikes it down, the diocese can still implement” the mandate.
“Let everyone who reads this know that the last thing I wish to do is wage a campaign to ‘Defund the Diocese,’” wrote Jenny Hay, chief organizer of the campaign, in an email to members of the diocese. “Every day, the Diocese of Knoxville is the Body of Christ to East Tennessee. This is why it is important to act now…”
For Hay, the issue of what amounts to a coercive vaccine mandate is triply important, since it violates conscience objections to abortion-tainted shots, infringes upon bodily autonomy, and is an affront to the freedom of diocesan employees.
“If I were somehow persuaded tomorrow that this was somehow ethical and safe, I wouldn’t take it now for the threat to freedom,” Hay told LifeSiteNews. In this way, said Hay, the mandate “is a clear violation of Catholic doctrine, because it will have the effect of coercing some diocesan employees to receive a vaccination which they do not want.”
But she indicated that the ethical and medical concerns are also serious in and of themselves.
“The health benefit to me didn’t justify the compromise with the evil of abortion. I get that that’s a different calculation for everybody, but for me, no — I’m healthy, I’m 51, I’m not gonna die from this disease. It’s not worth it to me,” said Hay.
She pointed out in her email to members of the diocese of Knoxville that “In its recent statement on the morality of using some anti-COVID vaccines, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith took the opportunity to emphasize the voluntary nature of vaccination, writing, ‘Practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary.’”
According to Hay, “The diocesan plan is also contrary to the Catholic faith because it tends toward a divided society of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated.”
Hay noted that the mandate is not only morally, but physically problematic, citing her sister as an example. She said her sister “is definitely anti-abortion,” but “for health reasons cannot take this vaccine.” Her sister’s doctor has even acknowledged this fact, said Hay, but will not give her a medical exemption for fear of putting their “license is at risk.”
Hay argues that even in addition to the physical risk posed by the jabs, they have not been proven to save lives. In her email to Stika, she wrote, “None of the available vaccines have been proven by a clinical trial to save lives by the standard clinical endpoint of all-cause mortality. In all Phase III clinical trials, the death rates in the placebo groups were statistically equal to the death rates in the vaccination groups.”
“In my mind we are protecting them from the lawsuits that are going to be way more expensive than whatever dent we put in their finances,” Hay told LifeSiteNews.
“Because the life-saving qualities of all COVID vaccines remain unproven, the diocesan plan also runs afoul the Nuremberg code,” Hay continued. “History will not look kindly on what you are doing now.”
Hay advises all Catholics of the Knoxville Diocese to:
- Bow your head where you are and say a sincere prayer for wisdom, courage, and every grace for Bishop Stika, all diocesan leaders and for yourself.
- Send a respectful email to Deacon Sean Smith (ssmith@dioknox.org). Deacon Smith is the Chief Operating Officer for the Diocese of Knoxville. You may wish to use the text below.
Quote:Subject: Defund the Diocese
Dear Deacon Smith,
The vaccination mandate which the Diocese of Knoxville plans to implement is contrary to the Catholic faith, because it coerces vaccination, and because it tends toward the creation of a divided society, punishing those who remain “unvaccinated.” If this plan goes into effect, I plan to participate in the campaign to “Defund the Diocese.”
Regretfully,
Your name
Your parish
|
|
|
Pontifical Academy for Life calls objections to abortion-tainted COVID vaccines ‘pure nonsense’ |
Posted by: Stone - 01-10-2022, 11:37 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Spiritual]
- No Replies
|
|
Pontifical Academy for Life calls objections to abortion-tainted COVID vaccines ‘pure nonsense’
The PAV’s social media outburst is hardly the first the time that the academy, reconstituted by Pope Francis in 2016, has attacked Catholics with conscience objections to the COVID injections.
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, current President of the Pontifical Academy for Life
Wed Jan 5, 2022
ROME (LifeSiteNews adapted) – In a bizarre tweet Sunday, the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV) claimed that abortion has “nothing to do” with the COVID vaccines tested on cells of aborted babies, while hailing the injections as “the only way to return to normal.” The academy, led by Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, also lashed out at Catholic critics, suggesting that their concerns about the links between the jabs and fetal cell testing are “pure nonsense.”
“Some ‘Catholics’ only insult @PontAcadLife @PagliaAbp,” the tweet read. “But #COVID19 exists, and the only way to return to normal is to get #vaccinated.”
“#VaccinesSaveLives and abortions have nothing to do with. [sic] The rest is pure nonsense, #malinformation, exploitation of #USA discomfort.” It’s not clear what PAV meant by “USA discomfort.” The tweet included screenshots of a New York Times article about the negative psychological impact of lockdowns in the U.S.
The academy tagged several liberal, nominally Catholic journalists, like Father James Martin, SJ, and later retweeted a post by Martin, a dissident and a heretic who advocates for same-sex “marriage” and has publicly referred to God as female.
In a second tweet Sunday with the same message, the PAV also tagged Joe Biden’s official presidential Twitter account, the U.S. Catholic bishops, and the FDA.
As the PAV failed to note, all COVID vaccines available in the United States and Europe relied on cell lines derived from aborted babies in development, testing, or both, sparking outrage among many people whose religious convictions prohibit them from involvement in abortion.
The injections are also failing to stop transmission and infection, with the most vaccinated countries in Europe ramping up new social restrictions amid record-setting case levels and the spread of the Omicron variant. In Denmark, more than 90 percent of Omicron infections have been detected in vaccinated people, who have accounted for the majority of recent virus deaths in multiple E.U. nations and American states.
The PAV’s social media outburst on Sunday is hardly the first the time that Paglia or the academy, which Pope Francis reconstituted in 2016, have defended the abortion-tainted jabs or attacked Catholics with conscience objections.
At a press conference with secular medical organizations in July, Paglia ripped Catholics who question the jabs, telling them to “listen to what the Church has already said.” The PAV hosted another conference in September to promote the injections and combat “vaccine hesitancy,” inviting pro-abortion speakers, including a rabbi and an ex-friar.
Described by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó as a “living scandal,” Paglia openly rejects core tenets of Catholic moral teaching, including on marriage, the family, and assisted suicide. He’s also known for infamously commissioning a homosexual painter to design a blasphemous, sexually-charged mural for his cathedral church that features Paglia himself embracing another man.
The archbishop has doubled down on his aggressive support of the vaccines in recent weeks, repeatedly speaking in favor of vaccinating young children with the experimental COVID shots.
“We have to do everything! Vaccinate everyone, including children, in order to protect the greatest number of people possible,” he said in an interview last month with Crux. “Vaccination protects children from any, even if less frequent, serious consequence of COVID-19,” Paglia claimed, making no mention of vaccine injuries or unknown, long-term effects of the injections.
A December statement from the PAV on “Children and Covid” even declared that “the Vatican also considers the Covid vaccination over the age of five advisable,” though the Vatican later scrubbed that paragraph, according to La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana.
Children and teenagers face virtually no risk of death or serious illness from coronavirus. Between 0-0.03 percent of COVID cases in the United States under age 18 have resulted in death, according to the American Pediatric Association. The survival rate for COVID has been estimated at no lower than 99.7 percent for all age groups under 60 years old.
At the same time, numerous deaths and serious injuries, including heart inflammation and other cardiac issues, have been reported in children soon after COVID vaccination. In California, a 15-year-old boy with no underlying health conditions died of stress cardiomyopathy last year just days after his second Pfizer jab, mirroring a similar incident in Michigan. A three-year-old girl in Argentina died of a heart attack the day after a Chinese Sinopharm shot last month.
Various Catholic leaders have stressed that the vaccines must remain voluntary and have acknowledged that Catholics can refuse coronavirus vaccination in good conscience.
The bishops of Colorado noted in an August letter that “there is no Church law or rule that obligates a Catholic to receive a vaccine — including COVID-19 vaccines.”
“The novelty of the SARS-CoV-2 and of the technologies for eliciting an immune response to prevent or mitigate COVID-19 leave several medical questions unanswered,” the National Catholic Bioethics Center has said. “Only time and careful study of the virus and benefits and adverse effects of the vaccines will provide the answers many persons need to give free and informed consent.”
“Any link to the abortion process, even the most remote and implicit, will cast a shadow over the Church’s duty to bear unwavering witness to the truth that abortion must be utterly rejected,” a group of Catholic prelates warned in an open letter last year. “The ends cannot justify the means,” they said, describing abortion as “one of the worst genocides known to man.”
Pope St. John Paul II founded the Pontifical Academy for Life in 1994 with famed Catholic geneticist and pro-life advocate Venerable Dr. Jérôme Lejeune to protect “the value of human life and the dignity of the person.”
Pope Francis reformed the Academy in 2016, however, rewriting its statutes to add a focus on the environment and removing a requirement that members swear an oath, crafted by Lejeune, to uphold Catholic teaching on the sanctity of human life. Francis subsequently purged dozens of pro-life, orthodox appointees of St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI and named new members who support abortion, euthanasia, contraception, homosexuality, and transgender hormone drugs, among other things.
|
|
|
Bill Filed In Washington Would Authorize ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated Famil |
Posted by: Stone - 01-10-2022, 10:14 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
Bill Filed In Washington Would Authorize ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated Families: ‘They Have Already Set Up The Internment Camps’
GP | January 8, 2022
The Washington State Board of Health may soon amend state law to authorize the involuntary detainment of residents as young as 5 years old in Covid-19 “internment camps” for failing to comply with the state’s experimental vaccine mandate.
WAC 246-100-040, a proposed revision to include Covid protocol under the state’s Communicable and Certain Other Diseases act, outlines “Procedures for isolation or quarantine.” The measure would allow local health officers at “his other sole discretion” to “issue an emergency detention order causing a person or group of persons to be immediately detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine.”
Health officers are required to provide documentation proving unvaccinated residents subject to detention have denied “requests for medical examination, testing, treatment, counseling, vaccination, decontamination of persons or animals, isolation, quarantine and inspection and closure of facilities” prior to involuntarily confinement in quarantine facilities, the resolution states.
The amended law would also allow health officers to deploy law enforcement officials to assist with the arrest of uncompliant Washington residents.
According to W 246-100-040, “a local health officer may invoke the powers of police officers, sheriffs, constables, and all other officers and employees of any political subdivisions within the jurisdiction of the health department to enforce immediately orders given to effectuate the purposes of this section in accordance with the provisions of RCW 43.20.050(4) and 70.05.120.”
The “emergency detention order” legalizes the isolation and detainment of American citizens who fail to voluntarily comply with Covid gene therapy shots “for a period not to exceed ten days.”
However, a judge may extend the forced quarantine “for a period not to exceed thirty days” if the segregated individual or family persists to refuse vaccination.
WAC 246-100-040 was certified on October 25, 2019, months prior to the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. The first confirmed case of Covid in the US was diagnosed in Seattle on January 20, 2020.
The Washington State Board of Health will hold a virtual public meeting on January 12 to discuss the application of W 246-100-040.
Scott Miller, a Washington-based Physician Assistant who runs a private pediatric clinic, lost his medical license in October for providing over two thousand critically-ill Covid patients with Ivermectin, vitamins and other effective treatments.
Miller will provide testimony during the WSBH 8-hour Zoom meeting on Wednesday to warn against mandating the experimental shot for children and present data showing acute vaccine-related injuries and fatalities.
Still struggling with the ramifications of having his medical license revoked for saving lives, Miller wonders how many innocent families are going to have to flee the state to find basic freedom that was once ubiquitous in the states if this so-called emergency legislation is passed.
“I was up at 5:30 this morning. I got a call from a woman in Ohio whose husband is day eight [Covid-infected] just crying asking me, ‘Can you please help, we are desperate.’ It is devastating knowing that I could have easily treated him as I had hundreds of people outside of Washington prior to the emergency suspension of my license for prescribing life-saving therapeutics,” Miller told The Gateway Pundit in an exclusive interview. “I can no longer actively help those families in need and it breaks my heart.
Quote:“I will frequently reach out to providers around the country that I consider heroes, asking if they will help intervene to save these innocent lives. If only the state medical investigators would look into the ‘quality of care’ or lack thereof within our hospital systems around our nation and question why over 700,000 Americans go to the hospital and never come home,” he said. “Supplemental oxygen and six milligrams of Dexamethasone has proven to be a catastrophic failure in mitigating acute respiratory distress syndrome. Yet, that is the primary treatment protocol across the country, even as patients decompensate and are statistically condemned to mechanical ventilation.
“If this mandate goes through for the kids, it is horrifying. It’s not just to attend school – if a local health department official deems you to be out of compliance, you can be detained against your will. It’s the most reprehensible overreach of emergency power I have ever seen of out of everything that has been imposed on us – they have taken everybody to herd them like cattle, herd them like prisoners into their homes and tell them that this is for our good and the greater good. While the people that made these rules go out to dinner with their friends without masks and get on planes and fly to vacations. They are saying ‘I know it’s going to be hard to be deprived of breathing or miss Christmas with your family this year.’ But they don’t adhere to these mandates. We see pictures of them celebrating holidays in person with thier families. ‘Do as we command, not as we do.'”
Washougal physician assistant Scott Miller speaks against COVID-19 mandates such as mask mandates and distance-learning during a Camas School Board meeting on May 10, 2021.
The pediatric physician assistant has provided countless mask exemptions for high-risk children with underlying respiratory and neurologic conditions. But exemptions are no longer accepted in the workplace or schools and won’t stop the contact tracers from detaining the non-compliant, Miller warns:
Quote:“I had written several medical exemptions and mask exemptions for patients with known history of vaccine injury and respiratory issues. In this new unrecognizable America, medical providers are not only barred from appropriately treating thier patients for Covid, but now they are no longer able to provide legitimate medical exemptions, including those that have positive antibody tests. Any provider found writing medical exemptions is at risk for being investigated. State medical investigators will often ignore medical history, charge providers with dissemminating ‘disinformation/misinformation,’ and be deemed unfit to have a medical license.
“The state has prioritized launching investigations into any practitioner that is courageous enough to appropriately care for their patients. If the practitioner’s plan of care diverts from the newly implemented restricted Center for Disease Control guidelines, they are at high risk of losing their license and livelihood.”
The Washington State Board of Health’s decision to conduct the meeting on involuntarily detaining purebloods on a Zoom call rather than a “dangerous” in-person forum makes holding members accountable even more of an uphill battle.
But patriots across Washington are putting pressure on two Republican board members, Gary Medvigy and Karen Dill Bowerman, to do the right thing.
Quote:There is a five-person committee. Medvigy and Bowerman are two very good people that may have followed the wrong science. That’s who I am basically going to be addressing at the meeting. If we can persuade this board to do the right thing and put our children first, our state will have hope. We are desperate for them to uphold the principles that our nation was founded on and preserve the freedom we have as parents and Americans to determine what goes into our children’s bodies. They have already set up the internment camps. I’ve seen photographs of them.
Washington’s Democrat Governor Jay Inslee is currently hiring a “strike team” to run the quarantine facilities.
“Isolation & quarantine strike team consultants” will earn $3,294 to $4,286 monthly for their services, according to a description posted in September at governementjobs.com, confirming the state’s plans for Covid encampment.
Strike teams will “provide for the needs of travelers” that stay at the facility, which is located in Centralia. The strike teams will also be tasked with “responding to emergencies, training contractors and new staff, and providing guest support as needed,” the job announcement explains.
Most of the population in Washington has been vaccinated, but the number of patients hospitalized for Covid-infection is suddenly and precipitously surging, proving vaccine inefficacy.
Gov. Inslee issued another threat to his unvaccinated constituents on Wednesday, warning new measures will be taken to address a 146 percent increase in cases in the past week and 46 percent increase in daily covid hospitalizations statewide omicron surge.
“Now is the time to re-double our efforts against this virus” he chided.
Yet, at least 76 percent of Washington, 5,793,378 people, has received at least one vaccine dose, while 5,193,988 people or 68% of Washington’s population has been fully vaccinated, according to USA Facts.
The state has also partnered with corporate retail giant Amazon to create a web portal to assure patients regularly test for Covid at home, The Olympian reports.
|
|
|
Audiobook: The End of the Present World and the Mysteries of the Future Life |
Posted by: Stone - 01-09-2022, 12:05 PM - Forum: Resources Online
- No Replies
|
|
Comments in the video description:
In the late nineteenth century, Father Charles Arminjon, a priest from the mountains of southeastern France, assembled his flock in the town cathedral to preach a series of conferences to help them turn their thoughts away from this life's mean material affairs-and toward the next life's glorious spiritual reward. His wise and uncompromising words deepened in them the spirit of recollection that all Christians must have: the abiding conviction that heavenly aims, not temporal enthusiasms, must guide everything we think, say, and do. When Father Arminjon's conferences were later published in a book, many others were able to reap the same benefit-including fourteen-year-old Therese Martin, then on the cusp of entering the Carmelite convent in Lisieux. Reading it, she says, "plunged my soul into a happiness not of this earth." Young Therese, filled with a sense of "what God reserves for those who love him, and seeing that the eternal rewards had no proportion to the light sacrifices of life," copied out numerous passages and memorized them, "repeating unceasingly the words of love burning in my heart." Let The End of the Present World and the Mysteries of the Future Life fill you with the same burning words of love, with the same ardent desire to know God above all created things, that St. Therese gained from them.
This book starts with the deepest, darkest, most hopeless places of faith and ends with the most joyful and hopeless jewels that are offered by God. It makes you traverse all of the harrowing details about the final judgement, purgatory, pain and suffering, and sin, before finally leading you to the hopeful place devoted to the rewards of the elect.
In this book you discover more information on judging the decay of present day, the meaning and construction of hell, purgatory, and heaven, the attributes of the anti-Christ and the Christ. It evaluates the requirements Heaven and Hell in accordance with justice.
It forewarned against the relativism of today, apathy, selfishness, and cruelty, and then expresses the love and commitment of God. While first I felt hopeless it then reminded me that God desires everyone to make it to heaven, but if they don't want to follow the rules he accepts that. There is hope, but it has to be a goal that is striven to accomplish.
Father Charles’ detailed analyses of the future life and the glories of heaven and the alternatives of purgatory and hell in the first 7 conferences only lead us to be able to understand the last 2 greatest conferences in their fullness: about the Sacrifice of the mass, and finally about the meaning of suffering in this life. These last two chapters are completely applicable to your life whether or not you are living through the apocalypse or not, but you need to have read through Fr’s beautiful reflections on the Book of Revelation and all its components in order to understand these great mysteries he leads to in the end.
The last chapter in particular, is very evidently a core inspiration for much of St Therese’s own writings and works and I believe this 9th conference in particular is the main reason she claimed that ”Reading this book was one of the greatest graces of my life”.
Father Charles Arminjon (1824-1885) was a priest from the town of Chambéry in the French Alps. After years as a seminary professor, Father Arminjon took up the mission of full-time preacher, and he went on to gain great renown for his ability to inspire in his listeners a deeper and more ardent love for Christ. Throughout France and abroad he delivered sermons, ran retreats, and preached at conferences – the most famous of which form the basis for The End of the Present World.
|
|
|
|